Posted on 11/04/2009 5:09:31 PM PST by Darren McCarty
A state lawmaker wants to allow same-sex marriage in Michigan.
Representative Pam Byrnes of Washtenaw County introduced a plan Wednesday to amend the state constitution to allow same-sex marriages, as well as recognize them from other states.
"Same-sex couples should not be denied the joys and responsibilities that come with making a lifetime commitment to each other," Byrnes said. "The Michigan I know is not a place that would deny visitation rights to a dying loved one or access to health care just because of someone's sexual orientation." In 2004, Michigan voters passed an amendment banning gay marriage.
The amendment introduced today would overturn it. Currently, 15 states have some level of protection for the rights of same-sex couples.
With all the problems this state has thanks to you and Granholm's pathetic policies bankrupting my state, instead of trying to fix the mess you created, you now want to introduce gay marriage.
We just voted on this in 2004. A ban on gay marriage passed 60/40. It's done. Personally, I think Byrnes is trying to use this to pander to the people in Ann Arbor city limits which is much more liberal than the more moderate townships.
Gay marriage is 0-31 when the people get to vote on it.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find only things evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelogus
Doesn’t Michgan have enough problems already?
We just did vote on it in 2004. 60-40.
I guess they haven’t learned from Maine.....or California...or Florida..or Arizona....or the 27 other states that have said “NO” to gay “marriage” when given the chance.
Good luck with that one. /sarc
Im going to set up an ad agency and follow the gays around looking to get a win. It would be like taking candy from babies.
Oh boy this sure will make Dearborn happy!
Dearbornistan?
Defeat this guy in 2010, please..!
Please, do everyone a favor and FIND SOME NEW MATERIAL!
That absurd meme has been run into the ground, then dug up and run into the ground again.
I have *NEVER* known any facility to deny visitation to ANYONE because that person is not the spouse.
It's a bald-faced, oft-repeated LIE.
Defend the institution of marriage! Defend the meaning of Family!
|
Should Same-Sex Marriages Be Recognized In Michigan?
|
|
|
Yes
No
|
34.3%
65.7%
This is not a scientific poll. Results are based off the input of users who participated.
|
She’s term limited and probably running for state senate. I live in the most liberal state senate district in the entire state, so it will be her or worse in 2010. Sorry. That’s Ann Arbor.
Get some tea party activists active in that district, also..
You never know, if it’s that bad have a Tea Party member run as a Democrat in that district (couldn’t hurt)?
Nor have I.
“Gay marriage is 0-31...”
When it happens, I hope their heterophobia doesn’t has them going around with baseball bats beating up the wrong people.
I recall those two UAW morons in Michigan (’82 recession) who took fists and a bat to an empty-handed Chinese guy by the name of Vincent Chin. They killed him in the parking lot of a Detroit area “tittie bar”. He was assumed to be Japanese and at that time, Japanese automakers were viewed as being mortal local enemies.
They should have taken it to Washington instead.
Now imagine the gay rights militancy on the DC mall waving their banners, clubs and torches, singing their special songs with boomboxes blaring- I see pepper spray, floodlights, satellite news vans and camera crews, tear gas, mounted police in riot gear. For the most part though, I see a bunch of “Moonbutts” having the time of their lives.
The Supreme Court is going to take care of that shortly.
Unless Romer is overturned (which has zero chance of happening), then the USSC has no choice but to mandate homosexual "marriages" in all 50 states, and they will do so as soon as they have an appropriate case, probably within two years.
They will almost certainly also mandate polygamy. Following Lawrence and the mystery passage in Casey, there's (almost) no choice for them about that, either - except they may not have the balls to take a case in the near future.
But homosexual "marriages"? That's a done deal. All this voting is just pissing in the wind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.